Perked load.

[Karnak]

The P-51 has no intrinsic right to carry more ord either. And the 190 is missing a bunch of ord options, so we're missing a bunch of functionality. No need to hurt it more.

And 190F right now has about as much ord capacity as a P-51 with the proposed changes. Considering the changes would be for game play, there is no gameplay-based reason to impose the same limit on the 190.

They are all either based on historical representation (not the case here) or personal bias.

Your bias is showing.  Badly.

There is no balance issue.  All sides have access to all weapons.  Retaining the 1000lb class weapon for the Fw190F-8 is nothing more than a sop to Luftwaffe fans.

By all means give it more of its load outs, but don't think the P-51D has anything to do with that.

[Zacherof]

I totally agree in giving the 190 it's due, but I don't believe in exempting it from proposed changes.
And I use the F model way more often than the 51.
Just to show an unbiased opinion.

[Clone155]

What's wrong with being bias? Let the 190 have unperked ords! 190 forever! 

[Zacherof]

What's wrong with being bias? Let the 190 have unperked ords! 190 forever! 

bro do you even 190?

[Tank-Ace]

Your bias is showing.  Badly.

There is no balance issue.  All sides have access to all weapons.  Retaining the 1000lb class weapon for the Fw190F-8 is nothing more than a sop to Luftwaffe fans.

By all means give it more of its load outs, but don't think the P-51D has anything to do with that.

The P-51D could just be considered the stock comparison fighter for the game. Hell, it IS the stock fighter; its the default fighter that is initially selected when you first boot up the game.

More important is the fact that, with these changes, the P-51D's MAXIMUM ORDNANCE CAPACITY is still greater than that of the 190F-8's is without the changes. Because nobody is proposing we limit the P-51D to 250lb bombs instead of 500lb bombs, clearly excessive ordnance capacity is not an issue for the 190F-8.


How is imposing an ordnance limitation on the 190F-8 with its single 500kg bomb any different than imposing a limitation on the P-51B with its 2x 500lb bombs.... Total ordnance capacity likely favors the P-51B, rockets included, yet just because the P-51B's ordnance is distributed into two smaller (but more effective and efficient) packages, it gets an exception from a perk price?





I mean come on Karnak, theres really only three possible things going on:

1) its about overall capacity, and actual bomb-size doesn't really matter.

2) Its about bomb-size, f**k ordnance capacity.

3) its about overall capacity, but you just think I'm biased, and have extended that to the idea itself.

[Karnak]

More important is the fact that, with these changes, the P-51D's MAXIMUM ORDNANCE CAPACITY is still greater than that of the 190F-8's is without the changes.

I don't think you are getting it.  It does not matter what the P-51D can or cannot do.   It doesn't matter what the P-47N can or cannot do.  It doesn't matter what the Typhoon can or cannot do.  You seem to be regarding it as a competition in which you want the Fw190F-8 to get as close to the P-51D as you can, but that is wrong thinking.  There is no competition here.  Bishops, Knights and Rooks all have access to all aircraft.  MA settings have no effect on AvA or scenario settings.

The 1000lb class weapon is much more capable when it comes to destroying things, perk tanks for example, than 500lb class weapons.  Restricting it on some fighters and not others does not make sense.  You are looking for an excuse to keep your 1000lb class weapon while stripping others of theirs.

I believe there is a fighter out there, one of the F4Us perhaps, that can carry a single 1000lb bomb.  That should be restricted too.

Either do them all or don't do any of them.

[Tank-Ace]

I don't think you are getting it.  It does not matter what the P-51D can or cannot do.   It doesn't matter what the P-47N can or cannot do.  It doesn't matter what the Typhoon can or cannot do.  You seem to be regarding it as a competition in which you want the Fw190F-8 to get as close to the P-51D as you can, but that is wrong thinking.  There is no competition here.  Bishops, Knights and Rooks all have access to all aircraft.  MA settings have no effect on AvA or scenario settings.

No, you're misunderstanding. Compare it to the P-51D, P-47, P-38, F4U-1C onwards, Typhoon, 110G, Mossie, etc. Any fighter that carries 2000lbs or more in bombs alone is in roughly the same possition to the 190F-8. That is to say, they carry almost twice the ordnance in bombs alone.


What you don't understand is that the P-51D is NOTHING MORE THAN A BASE FOR COMPARISON.

The 1000lb class weapon is much more capable when it comes to destroying things, perk tanks for example, than 500lb class weapons.  Restricting it on some fighters and not others does not make sense.  You are looking for an excuse to keep your 1000lb class weapon while stripping others of theirs.

Thats wasn't the reason for the proposed changes. And in any case, the 190's 500kg bomb is an SAP weapon, which has a reduced blast radius (90% of the reason larger bombs are more usefull, IMO).

Beyond that, the 500lb class of weapons are also more capable or effective when destroying town strucures, ship guns, non-perked and light-perked vehicles. An M4 goes up just as easy as a Panzer.

I believe there is a fighter out there, one of the F4Us perhaps, that can carry a single 1000lb bomb.  That should be restricted too.

Nope, you can drop any F4U down to 250lb bombs, IIRC.

Either do them all or don't do any of them.

Should the USA apply that same logic to welfare? Either everybody gets a handout, or nobody (not even the people that need one) does?

[Lusche]

 

[Dragon Tamer]

I'll give a +1 for certain planes being regulated, maybe not necessarily perked (ie: only so many 1k bombs can leave a base at a time). However I feel that the carrier planes should be able to keep their bomb loads. If they take an F4U two sectors just to hit a base, or even one sector, they are going to need at least 75% fuel to stay for any reasonable amount of time. A heavy F4U is not an easy bird to fly.

I'm sure we all know what has brought about this request and why it is so heavily favored. Shame on the guys who abuse the system. I personally love when I get a head start on them. Their bomb laden planes are easy kills, and they usually are quick to ditch ords at the first sign of trouble.

The way it would work would be similar to the following:

-A full "squad" of planes can up with the max load out at a time. A squad in this case being 4 to 6 planes. I know that squads in WWII had more planes (between 12 and 24 if I'm not mistaken), but this is an attempt to work around the AH numbers. 12 P-47s can still effectively shut down and capture a base.

-Once a "squad" has taken off from the base, there is a "resupply" time assigned to the base... say 5 minutes. If only one plane takes off then that percentage of 5 mins will be given to the time.

I feel that putting a cap on the number of ords able to leave a base at a given time for fighters would help to do one of three things.

1) They have to wait until the entire horde can take off (preferable taking several minutes) this would allow others to spot the massive dar bar that is growing in the sector and prepare for the attack.

2) They go straight to the base after upping but the cap forces their numbers to be thinned, making it a much more manageable situation.

3) They have to up out of separate bases, thus making it harder to coordinate targets (unless they are all on the same vox and no mission ever has all the players on the mission vox). Some would also have to fly further to reach their targets possibly limiting their time over target.

Exceptions would be having bombers in a mission would allow for all the bombers to carry their load out, but fighters would still have a cap on how many bombs can taken (let's say 4 heavy fighters for clean up). Hopefully this will allow a strategic element to be put back in the game.

[Karnak]

No, you're misunderstanding. Compare it to the P-51D, P-47, P-38, F4U-1C onwards, Typhoon, 110G, Mossie, etc. Any fighter that carries 2000lbs or more in bombs alone is in roughly the same possition to the 190F-8. That is to say, they carry almost twice the ordnance in bombs alone.


What you don't understand is that the P-51D is NOTHING MORE THAN A BASE FOR COMPARISON.

You still don't get it.  Different aircraft have different loads.  There isn't an attempt to make them all the same.  It doesn't matter what any other aircraft carries. Either you are restricting 1000lb class weapons, or you aren't.

Thats wasn't the reason for the proposed changes. And in any case, the 190's 500kg bomb is an SAP weapon, which has a reduced blast radius (90% of the reason larger bombs are more usefull, IMO).

I've hit a Tiger I with a 500lb bomb (hit sprite) and had the Tiger survive.  The Tiger player's response was "That was LOUD!"

Beyond that, the 500lb class of weapons are also more capable or effective when destroying town strucures, ship guns, non-perked and light-perked vehicles. An M4 goes up just as easy as a Panzer.

That isn't what is being discussed though.  Hangars are the main thing here.
 

Nope, you can drop any F4U down to 250lb bombs, IIRC.

You really missed my point?  Really?  The F4U-1 and F4U-1A can carry a single 1000lb bomb, kind of like the Fw190F-8.  Those single 1000lb bombs should be perked as well, even though it drops the F4U-1 and F4U-1A below the P-51D's two 500lb bombs or the F4U-1D's two 500lb bombs.  The advantage of the P-51D or F4U-1D are that they can carry two 500lb bombs rather than one.  It is one of their strengths.  Picking and choosing which 1000lb class weapons get perked and which don't get perked is an attempt to remove that advantage.  If you want the Fw190F-8 to have that, get a 250kg loadout for it, if such a thing existed.

Should the USA apply that same logic to welfare? Either everybody gets a handout, or nobody (not even the people that need one) does?

The Bishops, Knights and Rooks are all able to use anything in the game.  Your point makes no sense unless you are arguing from a viewpoint where German stuff has to be compensated for some reason.  Do you really want to go down that rabbit hole with your Me262 and Me163?

[Tank-Ace]

You still don't get it.  Different aircraft have different loads.  There isn't an attempt to make them all the same.  It doesn't matter what any other aircraft carries. Either you are restricting 1000lb class weapons, or you aren't.

The system can clearly handle more than an all or nothing system. So why use such a system when there are cases that warrant exception?

And its not really about bomb size. Is about fighters with large capacities displacing bombers in the MA. That was the entire motivation for the proposed limitations.

I've hit a Tiger I with a 500lb bomb (hit sprite) and had the Tiger survive.  The Tiger player's response was "That was LOUD!"

Valid point. Still though...  2 out of 11 actual tanks, both 2 of the 3 least common, one being THE least common.

That isn't what is being discussed though.  Hangers are the main thing here.

So it's capacity that's more important, not bomb size. Just make the 500kg GP bomb unrestricted, and restrict the SAP bomb.

I'm fine with the other 190s having the restriction, it's just the F8 was an attacker first and foremost, and it won't be used in that role of it can only carry 500lbs of ordnance in bombs.

Add the wing racks, and you can put the restriction on it as well.

The advantage of the P-51D or F4U-1D are that they can carry two 500lb bombs rather than one.  It is one of their strengths.  Picking and choosing which 1000lb class weapons get perked and which don't get perked is an attempt to remove that advantage.  If you want the Fw190F-8 to have that, get a 250kg loadout for it, if such a thing existed.

The 190 had that same advantage in real life. It just doesn't in the game. I've asked for it repeatedly.

It's not removing an advantage, because that particular advantage didn't exist in real life. It's compensating for what we don't have in the game.

There is precedent for this in aircraft substitutions in scenarios. Instead of just ignoring history, we do what we can, and work with what we have.

The Bishops, Knights and Rooks are all able to use anything in the game.  Your point makes no sense unless you are arguing from a viewpoint where German stuff has to be compensated for some reason.  Do you really want to go down that rabbit hole with your Me262 and Me163?

Or if you're arguing from a standpoint of diversity being an asset, and encouraging diversity being worth while.

It's better for the game play that I prefer the 190 to the P-51, just as is better you (probably) prefer the Mosquito.

[Karnak]

Then the proper way of going about it would be to get your two 250kg bomb load out added.  The more options on the Fw190F-8 the better.

[Butcher]

How is imposing an ordnance limitation on the 190F-8 with its single 550kg bomb

Here's a problem - its said a 190F could carry a 1600kg bomb, however I've never seen any proof it did carry it, let alone a 500kg bomb. Someone has to have certain proof before it would be added.

I researched it a ton a while back, I could not get 100% proof, however I can prove a 190G did infact carry a 500kg bomb on a long range mission, however we don't have 190G's

[Tank-Ace]

Here's a problem - its said a 190F could carry a 1600kg bomb, however I've never seen any proof it did carry it, let alone a 500kg bomb. Someone has to have certain proof before it would be added.

I researched it a ton a while back, I could not get 100% proof, however I can prove a 190G did infact carry a 500kg bomb on a long range mission, however we don't have 190G's

500kg bomb, and it's already in the game. We're taking about the wing racks that could carry up to a 250kg bomb, and maybe a 500kg bomb (nobody was able to ID the 190 model in a photo)

[Tank-Ace]

Then the proper way of going about it would be to get your two 250kg bomb load out added.  The more options on the Fw190F-8 the better.

Im not in charge of what is added. They've added some stuff that's below if on the priority list, and I've asked repeatedly.

Given that this would adversely affect the F8, and is entirely out of our hands when we get an actual fix, it wouldn't be entirely inappropriate to wave the restriction until it has the wing racks.